Connon v. Goebel
JOHN M. CONNON Et Al., Respondents, v. HENRY OSCAR GOEBEL, Etc., Et Al., Appellants
- Proceeding
- appeal from a judgment
- Trial court
- Superior Court of Los Angeles County
- Trial judge
- Charles S. Burnell
- Outcome
- affirmed — Affirmed.
- Area
- civil
- Panel
- John W. Preston (author)
Analysis
No analysis yet. When one exists it is a model's reading of this opinion — the rulings it reviewed, whether it agrees with the court, and the authorities it checked — shown beside the court's own disposition, never in place of it. How analyses are made.
Opinion — Preston
PRESTON, J.
Action by innocent purchaser for value before maturity of two negotiable promissory notes each secured by a separate mortgage upon a single tract of land in Los Angeles County. The usual decree of foreclosure and sale was entered. Defendants have appealed. The defense is usury at the inception of both transactions. The court found as a fact that usury was present. But this fact is not disclosed upon the face of the notes. The purchase for value before maturity without notice renders the plea of no avail as against plaintiffs.
(Liebelt v. Carney, 213 Cal. 250 [2 Pac. (2d) 144, 78 A. L. R. 405].) Moreover, as to the larger of the two notes defendants expressly certified in writing to plaintiffs that no usury was exacted. Still persisting, appellants urge that the smaller note was dated in 1922, at which time under the law the presence of a mortgage rendered the note it secured non-negotiable. If this were true, it avails appellants nothing as the note was extended and republished after the law was amended and prior to the purchase by respondents.
The judgment is affirmed.
Shenk, J., Seawell, J., Langdon, J., Curtis, J., and Waste, C. J., concurred.
Cites, in this corpus
- Liebelt v. Carney Docket No. S.F. 13671. · 1931-07-30
Cited by
- Nuckolls v. Bank of California S. F. No. 15709 · 1937-11-27
- Brown v. Guar. Mortg. Co. of Cal. Docket Nos. L.A. 13715, 13716. · 1934-04-16